Renal Adaptation Following Uni-Nephrectomy in Living Kidney Donors.

ObjectivesWe compared early recovery outcomes between living kidney donors who received total intravenous (IV) propofol versus inhalational desflurane during hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy.DesignA single-centre, prospective randomised controlled trial.SettingUniversity hospital.ParticipantsStudy participants were enrolled between October 2019 and February 2020. A total of 80 living donors were randomly assigned to an intravenous propofol group (n=40) or a desflurane group (n=40).InterventionPropofol group received intravenous propofol and desflurane group received desflurane, as a maintenance anaesthetic.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe quality of postoperative functional recovery was primarily assessed using the Korean version of the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40K) questionnaire on postoperative day 1. Secondarily, ambulation, pain score, rescue analgesics, complications and total hospital stay were assessed postoperatively.ResultsOur study population included 35 males and 45 females. The mean age was 46±13 years. The global QoR-40K score (161 (154–173) vs 152 (136–161) points, respectively, p=0.001) and all five subdimension scores (physical comfort, 49 (45–53) vs 45 (42–48) points, respectively, p=0.003; emotional state, 39 (37–41) vs 37 (33–41) points, respectively, p=0.005; psychological support, 30 (26–34) vs 28 (26–32) points, respectively, p=0.04; physical independence, 16 (11–18) vs 12 (8-14) points, respectively, p=0.004; and pain, 31 (28–33) vs 29 (25-31) points, respectively, p=0.021) were significantly higher in the intravenous propofol group than the desflurane group. The early ambulation success rate and numbers of early and total steps were higher, but the incidence of nausea/vomiting was lower, in the intravenous propofol group than the desflurane group. The total hospital stay after surgery was shorter in the intravenous propofol group than the desflurane group.ConclusionsIntravenous propofol may enhance the quality of postoperative recovery in comparison to desflurane in living kidney donors.Trial registration numberKCT0004365.

Download Full-text

Long-term risks after kidney donation: how do we inform potential donors? A survey from DESCARTES and EKITA transplantation working groups

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation ◽

10.1093/ndt/gfab035 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Geir Mjøen ◽

Umberto Maggiore ◽

Nicos Kessaris ◽

Diederik Kimenai ◽

Bruno Watschinger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Evaluation Process ◽

Kidney Donation ◽

Kidney Donors ◽

Living Kidney Donors ◽

Relative Risks ◽

Written Information ◽

The Difference ◽

Stage Renal Disease ◽

End Stage

Abstract Background Publications from the last decade have increased knowledge regarding long-term risks after kidney donation. We wanted to perform a survey to assess how transplant professionals in Europe inform potential kidney donors regarding long-term risks. The objectives of the survey were to determine how they inform donors and to what extent, and to evaluate the degree of variation. Methods All transplant professionals involved in the evaluation process were considered eligible, regardless of the type of profession. The survey was dispatched as a link to a web-based survey. The subjects included questions on demographics, the information policy of the respondent and the use of risk calculators, including the difference of relative and absolute risks and how the respondents themselves understood these risks. Results The main finding was a large variation in how often different long-term risks were discussed with the potential donors, i.e. from always to never. Eighty percent of respondents stated that they always discuss the risk of end-stage renal disease, while 56% of respondents stated that they always discuss the risk of preeclampsia. Twenty percent of respondents answered correctly regarding the relationship between absolute and relative risks for rare outcomes. Conclusions The use of written information and checklists should be encouraged. This may improve standardization regarding the information provided to potential living kidney donors in Europe. There is a need for information and education among European transplant professionals regarding long-term risks after kidney donation and how to interpret and present these risks.

Download Full-text